​Surveillance state must be subject to open critique – legal experts

New surveillance laws and immunities granted to police and intelligence service hackers must be subject to open assessment and thorough critique, according to a group of legal academics.

In a letter sent to all
MP’s on Tuesday, 38 specialist signatories drawn from across
different fields of law explained their concerns and called for a
proper assessment of the risks posed by Britain’s security
state.

Their aim is to “ensure that any changes in the law, and
especially any expansions of power, are fully and transparently
vetted by parliament, and open to consultation from the public
and all relevant stakeholders.”

They also raise concerns that the law was quietly changed to
grant police and spy agency hackers immunity by amending the
Serious Crimes Act 2015.

The signatories say: “The government should not be permitted
to surreptitiously change the law whenever it so desires,
especially where such changes put our privacy and security at
risk,” the signatories conclude.

“We are calling on all members of the House of Commons, new
and returning, and of all political persuasions to support us in
this by ensuring parliamentary scrutiny is applied to all
developments in UK surveillance laws and powers as proposed by
the current government.”

The change in law was first reported last Friday by the campaign
group Privacy International, which had been in the process of
bringing a legal challenge against the government in the hope of
curtailing GCHQ’s invasive practices.

The group claims it and other interested parties were told about
the change in law – which occurred in early March – just hours
before it was due to hear the response to its legal challenge.

In a statement, Privacy International said: “The government
has quietly ushered through legislation amending the anti-hacking
laws to exempt GCHQ from prosecution. Privacy International and
other parties were notified of this just hours prior to a hearing
of their claim against GCHQ’s illegal hacking operations in the
Investigatory Powers Tribunal.”

“The change not only affects Privacy International’s claim,
but also grants UK law enforcement new leeway to potentially
conduct cyber-attacks within the UK.”